> > The whole point of our anti-GAK position is that
> > government mandated key escrow is bad.
>
> "Our" anti-GAK position.
>
> I would like to hear Jim Clark say "GAK is bad".
James A. Donald wrote:
> > The whole point of our anti-GAK position is that
> > government mandated key escrow is bad.
>
> "Our" anti-GAK position.
Sorry, I was referring to the official Netscape company position, not
the personal position of either myself or Jim Clark.
> I would like to hear Jim Clark say "GAK is bad".
So would I. I don't know if he will take such a position or not.
I do believe that the company, Netscape, will take such a position
in the coming week.
> I would also like to hear him, and you, refrain from using the phrase
> "key escrow" and instead use the phrase "Government Access to Keys".
I've been trying to use either GAK, or "mandatory key escrow" to
refer to the hated beast. If I've used just "key escrow" in that
context, I'm sorry. I've been trying to use the term "key escrow"
for cases when it is not mandatory.
> I draw your attention to the fact that Bill Gates did not use the
> intentionally misleading phrase "key escrow" in his book.
I haven't read his book. Did he take a position against GAK? Did
he say that if GAK is required by law his company would or would not
implement it? A summary of his comments on this topic would be
informative.
--Jeff
--
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
[email protected] - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.